|
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#232
June 6th 06, 03:02 PM
posted to sci.space.policy,alt.conspiracy,sci.space.history
|
|||
|
|||
Drudge: Spy satellites watch Americans from space
(Eric Chomko) wrote:
:Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: : :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: : :: :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: :: : :: :: :: :Rand Simberg ) wrote: :: :: :: :: On Tue, 30 May 2006 16:13:01 -0500, in a place far, far away, Pat :: :: :: :: Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in :: :: :: :: such a way as to indicate that: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Eric Chomko wrote: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: Rand, he's not agreeing with me per se, he's reading the writing on the :: :: :: :: wall. :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: BTW- Halliburton lost money under Cheney's CEOship, so maybe he's trying :: :: :: :: to make up for past mistakes. :: :: :: :: Here, we see Halliburton proving war is good for stock prices and other :: :: :: :: growing things: :: :: :: :: http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/c/5y/h/hal :: :: :: :: When the war starts, it's at around $20 per share; at the moment it's :: :: :: :: down from its $80 per share high to around $75. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: Yes, obviously, that's the only reason we had a war--for Halliburton. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :Not just for Halliburton but others that profit from war as well. The ones :: :: :: :that were able to bankroll Bush into the White House. :: :: : :: :: :: You mean the majority of the American people? I don't know how to :: :: :: break this to you, El Chimpo, but Bush collected more in SMALL :: :: :: INDIVIDUAL DONATIONS than his opponents. The idea that he (or anyone) :: :: :: can be "bankrolled into the White House" by big companies is beyond :: :: :: ignorant and ill-informed and well into stuck on stupid. :: :: : :: :: :Not big companies but a small cabal of powerful people. :: : :: :: For a definition of 'small' that leads to them outnumbering the :: :: individual contributors giving to the Democratic candidate.... :: : :: :If you think the Power Elite is split down party lines, then you're as :: :ignorant as ever. : :: Gee, it's a good thing I speak 'stupid political cliche' or I might be :: confused by your spate of non sequiturs. : :: :: :: :PNAC, Rand, we have :: :: :: :been telling you this for a few years now. Why do you continue to pretend :: :: :: :not to know? :: :: : :: :: :: Because you say all sorts of silly tripe and support none of it. :: :: : :: :: :I have backed up everything I have posted. Have you ever read C. Wright :: :: :Mills's book, "The Power Elite"? Anthony Sutton's, "The American :: :: :Establishment"? :: : :: :: Nope. But then I haven't read lots of things. No doubt the same :: :: thing applies to everyone. :: : :: :I agree there. Seems like you don't want to read these books, either. :: :What's a matter, Fred? Afraid they'll challenge your world view? : :: I don't do lots of things, Eric. Most of them I don't do because I :: have better things to do with my time. : :Yeah, right... Yeah, exactly right. :: Sorry to hear that you apparently do not. : :Yes, you're sorry... Yes, I am. If you had something better to do with your time, perhaps you wouldn't post so much egregiously stupid **** and perhaps what you did post would contain a bit more worthwhile substance. :: :: :No, you read right-wing rags and shake your head in agreement, and when :: :: :you disagree, you write it off as left-wing media, like so many other :: :: :dittohead Limbots... :: : :: :: Don't look now but you're lying again. It's ok, though. We're used :: :: to that from you. :: : :: :We? You and that frog in your pocket? Again, you have no friends and hate :: :yourself. : :: Don't look now but you're lying again. It's ok, though. We're used :: to that from you. : :: :: Hint: I read fiction, technical stuff, and Usenet. :: : :: :I figured as much. : :: No you didn't, or you wouldn't have made the stupid remark about how I :: "read right-wing rags". : :: :: :: :: Loosen up the chinstrap on that tinfoil hat, Pat--it's cutting off the :: :: :: :: blood supply to your brain. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :Yep, just call him a conspiracy buff and move on. How establishment of :: :: :: :you. Thanks to dupes like, you Rand, the powers-at-be continue to rip off :: :: :: :all of us. :: :: : :: :: :: You're even loonier than I thought you were, El Chimpo, and that's :: :: :: going some. :: :: : :: :: :Yeah, and you're a stablizing force in the universe. McClod, idiots like :: :: :you voted Bush in office becuse of ignorance. Nothing more. :: : :: :: Yes. Idiots like me voted Bush into office because of ignorance on :: :: the part of those running against him and their supporters. :: : :: :Nope, the GOP propaganda machine was able to dupe more people into :: :thinking Kerry was a bad guy vs. Bush having any real credentials. We :: :deserve the leaders we elect. : :: No you don't. You just got lucky you didn't get what you deserve. So :: did we, since we live in the same country with you. : :Too bad you're from another planet. Yes, we're from Earth. Lord knows where you're from, given the idiocies of which you are capable. :: :: There was no other credible choice. As long as Democrats keep :: :: thinking (and I use the term loosely) as you do here, that will :: :: continue to be the case. :: : :: :Until the GOP steps in their own **** once again. When the really big **** :: :happens, the GOP is in office. I cite the Great Depression as reference :: :number 1. : :: Nope. Even the GOP screwing up doesn't seem to be enough to help your :: lot. : :It has in the past and will again in the future. Oh, no. It hasn't helped your lot. Your heads are firmly up and locked. It has helped others, though. One hopes the sane ones can take back the Democratic Party someday.... -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn 
|
|
#233
June 6th 06, 03:37 PM
posted to sci.space.policy,alt.conspiracy,sci.space.history
|
|||
|
|||
|
Drudge: Spy satellites watch Americans from space
(Eric Chomko) wrote:
:Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: : :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: : :: :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: :: : :: :: :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: :: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :Fred J. McCall (aka Mclod) wrote: :: :: :: :: :: :: What's too bad is that folks like you are unable to realize that "I :: :: :: :: :: :: Hate Bush And So Should You" simply isn't a convincing argument, much :: :: :: :: :: :: less a good policy prescription for what you'd change. :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :I don't care if you love the guy, based upon results, he's weak... :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: And I don't care what stupid **** you believe I think, so far your :: :: :: :: :: only recommendation for change is pretty well non-existent. What :: :: :: :: :: would 'your' candidate do differently, other than be 'not George'. :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :Nope, George was party to starting a war for profit. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: You're a liar, El Chimpo. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :Attack the message, McClod, not the messenger. Exactly what part of the :: :: :: :message is a lie? :: :: : :: :: :: All of it. You said one sentence. It's a lie. :: :: : :: :: :: Is that not clear enough for you? :: :: : :: :: :You took the coward's way out as usual. Have you always been a wetnap? :: :: :Friggin wimp... :: : :: :: You lie and then insult me for pointing it out? :: : :: :What lie, Fred? You like calling others liars but fail to challenge your ::  wn beliefs. Maybe all these people that appear to you as liars, exist:: :because you're truly screwed up? You ARE the only common entity in the :: :eqaution, so... : :: You made the statement "George was party to starting a war for :: profit". That statement is a lie. What SHOULD someone call you, if :: not a liar? : :It isn't a lie. It is the truth. No, Eric. Just because you're an ideological loon reality doesn't bend for the rest of us just to suit you. :What we don't know is if outting a CIA :worker to spite her husband was done That much is right. We don't even know if that was done. I mean, she was routinely driving in and out of CIA HQ. Not much left to 'out'. :as a means to get back at him for :not playing along with the White House's scheme to make Saddam Hussien :look like he was trying to buy uranium. We'll find that out next spring :when Scooter Libby takes the stand. You might want to go look at just what it is that Libby got charged with. Again, just because you're an ideological loon you don't get your own reality. :: :: Friggin' dip****... :: : :: :: :: :: :He and others of his :: :: :: :: :ilk talk about alternate forms of energy but do nothing about it in the :: :: :: :: :area that they could, like funding research. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: That's why we're seeing hybrid vehicles and the big push to ethanol :: :: :: :: fuels, right? :: :: :: : :: :: :: :A token attempt. :: :: :: :: :: :: You obviously are absolutely uninformed. You have to be to think :: :: :: that. :: :: : :: :: :The only thing Bush has done is start the war in Iraq. :: : :: :: False statement. :: : :: :Oh, done nothing about $3 gas prices. Forgot that one. : :: Stupid statement. It doesn't bury the stink of your usual lies. : :: ::  on't you find it a:: :: :little odd that he made the claim that he won't pull out the troops at all :: :: :for any reason? :: : :: :: No. Don't you find it a little dishonest to utter lies like that one? :: : :: :: Yes, you're lying AGAIN... :: : :: :No, Fred! Bush clearly stated that he has no intention to pull the troops :: ut while he is president and further than another president will have to:: :do it. : :: Cite? Not for your attempted rephrase (which is also a sufficient :: distortion to qualify as a lie) but for your original claim that "he :: made the claim that he won't pull out the troops at all for any :: reason". : :..the decision will be for future leaders (in Iraq and America) toi :decide. : :: I'd think that would be easy to point to if he'd ever said it. : :: You're a liar, El Chimpo. : :Fred, You call anyone a liar when they point out a truth that hurts you. No, Eric. I call anyone a liar WHEN THEY TELL LIES. :It is yet another one of your childish traits. "Liar, liar, pants on :fire." (LLPOF). You and Guth... hahahahaha I'll simply note your inability to provide even a single cite to back up your lying remarks above. Try as you might, scratching away madly isn't going to cover that over, Eric. :: :: :That being nearly three years before he's out of office. I :: :: :do. Why make a comment like that? It is obvious that the war and nothing :: :: :else, including different forms of energy is Bush's sole commitment. :: : :: :: Please provide a credible cite for the statement you claim was made. :: : :: :And read the actual Bush quotes: :: :http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...21_bush22.html : :: It says nothing remotely like what you claim has been said. Try :: again, liar. : :Bull****! You read it. This part: :'Asked at a White House news conference whether there will come a time no :U.S. forces are in Iraq, he said, "That will be decided by future  residents and future governments of Iraq."'Oh, I see. Your problem is you simply cannot read. :Remote? He's unwilling to even consider a timetable. That means the troops :are there until his successor pulls them out! And he stated it nearly 3 :years before he leaves office. Or perhaps he simply recognizes, given how things look right now, that the job won't be done next week. Even at that he said nothing remotely resembling what you claimed in your lies, above. :: :: :: :Get a Democrat in there and see what happens with hybrids :: :: :: :and gasohol. :: :: :: :: :: :: We had a Democrat in there for 8 years before Bush. What happened :: :: :: with hybrids and gasohol, El Chimpo? :: :: : :: :: :Gas was just over a buck a gallon back then. Now it's $3 a gallon. :: : :: :: Gas hit a historical high in constant dollar terms under Carter :: :: (another Democrat). What did HE do? :: : :: :Tried to use gasohol but was blocked. : :: Wrong. You're lying again. : :Ok, why didn't gasohol take off like Carter wanted back in the late 70s? Uh, Eric? You do realize that 'gasohol' is an AIR POLLUTION measure, not a petroleum conservation measure, right? Uh, Eric? You are aware that 'gasohol' is widely used in many places, aren't you? Uh, Eric? You're aware that Carter didn't even START funding research into 'gasohol' until 1980 (cmsn under Birch Bayh), aren't you? Uh, Eric? You know that it wasn't until January of 1981, just before he left office, that Carter ordered Federal vehicles and that even that was a pretty weak order, aren't you? "By the authority vested in me as President of the United States of America by Section 271 of the Energy Security Act (94 Stat. 710; Public Law 96-294; 42 U.S.C. 8871), in order to require Federal agencies which own or lease motor vehicles to use gasohol in those vehicles which are capable of operating on gasohol where it is available at reasonable prices and in reasonable quantities,..." :: :Tried to get hostages out or Iraq, :: :too, but was blocked. : :: Wrong. He was inept. It's not the same thing. : :False. We was working against a team of Republicans working under the :table with the Iranians. Cite? Or is this just something else you made up out of your own private reality? :: :Then when the deal with the hostage-takers was made :: :by Bush's daddy, they were freed the same day Reagan took office. The :: :latter is treason, BTW. : :: Wrong. You're lying again. : :Says you. Truth hurts doesn't it McClod? You were in the Navy, did you :spend your entire stint with your head up your butt? Truth feels fine. It's your own private delusions that 'hurt'. I was in the Gulf when the Iranians took our embassy, El Chimpo. Had the better part of you run down your momma's leg by then? Even if your delusions were true it wouldn't be "treason", you dumbass. Go read up what it takes for something to constitute treason in the United States. Gods, you're as big an idiot as those right wing loons who are always screeching 'treason' over this or that. :: :: :So you :: :: :have a situation where we should be looking for alternate forms of energy :: :: :due to high gas prices but since a friend of Big Oil is in the WH nothing :: :: :gets done and they get richer. :: : :: :: No, we just have a situation where people like you lie. :: : :: :Translation: Fred claiming someone is a liar really means he's too :: :clueless to understand the situation at hand. : :: Wrong. You're lying again. : :LLPOF!!!! I'll simply note all the factual support Eric offers for his own personal delusions and let it go at that. :: :: :: And just by the way, I'm not talking about gasohol (which we use :: :: :: around here and have for a long time). I'm talking about 80% ethanol :: :: :: fuel REPLACING gasoline as a fuel, not just 10% being used as an :: :: :: oxidizing agent in gasohol. :: :: : :: :: :Not with your boy in the WH... :: : :: :: Pull your head out and check the facts, El Chimpo. You're lying :: :: again. :: : :: :Provide a cite where Bush has done more for alternative forms of energy as :: :compared to what Carter tried.... : :: See the 2005 State of the Union address. : :Now THOSE were lies... In other words, you ask for a cite and then when you get one simply pretend it didn't happen. It's bad enough that you're a raving loon, El Chimpo, but it's even worse that you simply don't allow ANY reality to intrude. :: : but was overruled, mostly by bought members :: f your party like our current president.: :: Wrong. You're lying again. : :: :: :: :: Pull your head out. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: And I note that you STILL don't answer just what your candidate would :: :: :: :: do differently, other than be 'not George'. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :Anyone else wouldn't pander to Big Oil as W is now doing. :: :: :: :: :: :: Don't look now but you're lying again, El Chimpo. :: :: : :: :: :Nope, right on target... :: : :: :: It's easy to hit 'targets' when you're willing to lie, as you do :: :: constantly. :: : :: :Fred, again, confusing me lying with his lack of knowledge and shallow :: :"thinking". : :: No, I confuse your lying with your making false and misleading :: statements with no support and no grounding in reality. : :: Oh, wait. That's not confusion. That's just you lying again. : :yawn Snappy comeback. Wow! :: :: :: :: :: :: By all means, you keep it up. It pretty much guarantees that you'll :: :: :: :: :: :: be singing the same song in 2009 that you're singing right now, with :: :: :: :: :: :: only the names changed. :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :You have to get past the 2006 elections before your rhetoric has any effect. Do :: :: :: :: :: :you think the GOP is going to actually gain seats in Congress? If so, would you :: :: :: :: :: :like to bet? I take PayPal... :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: You won't be seeing George Bush replaced in 2006. If you think you :: :: :: :: :: will, would you like to bet? I take cash. :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :You're right, he'll just be more and more of a lame duck. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: And you and yours will become more and more birdbrained to match. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :You're the coot. :: :: :: :: :: :: And you're the coot droppings. :: :: : :: :: :And you're the insect eating coot droppings. :: : :: :: Make up your mind. You said I was the coot. :: : :: :: What are you, about 7? :: : :: :...times smarter than you... : :: Yeah, sure. I flush better brains than you'll ever have, **** for :: brains. : :Too bad your life formula has produce a bitter old man. Yeah, I'm real bitter, Eric. Why, I just feel horrible every day leaving my 2500 square foot home and driving my Mercedes roadster (fueled by gasohol for a big part of the year, just by the way) in to work every day. Yeah, it's enough to make one bitter. snicker :: :: :: :: :: If you think George Bush's 'negative coattails' have anything to do :: :: :: :: :: with Congressional elections, you must have been asleep for about the :: :: :: :: :: last quarter century or more. :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :We'll just have to wait and see. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: Presidential 'coattails' haven't worked for at least a quarter century :: :: :: :: now, even in the classical positive sense during presidential election :: :: :: :: years. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :Explain why the GOP took over Congress in 1994. Clinton had nothing to do :: :: :: :with that? :: :: :: :: :: :: Nope. CONGRESS had to do with that. Take a look at Clinton's :: :: :: popularity in 1994. He won the Presidency again 2 years later. Can :: :: :: you seriously believe that the turnover in Congress was related to :: :: :: CLINTON? :: :: : :: :: :That's what the GOP rhetoric was in the era. Go ahead ane read what Newt :: :: :Gingrich said about it at the time. :: : :: :: I don't need to read it. I was around then. :: : :: :So were others in a coma... : :: But you weren't. So you lie, instead. : :: :: You're kidding yourself. :: : :: :: :: :: If you think 'negative coattails' are going to be a telling factor in :: :: :: :: an off-year election, you need to move away from the crack pipe. :: :: :: :: You've had enough. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :Again we'll have to wait and see. Besides I think Marrion Barry is more :: :: :: :your type than mine... :: :: :: :: :: :: Don't flatter yourself, El Chimpo. You don't think. :: :: : :: :: :Clearer, deeper and more thorough than you McClod. Did you even make :: :: :sergeant after you dropped out of high school and joined the military? :: : :: :: The Navy doesn't have sergeants and I have multiple college degrees. :: : :: :Seaman or a Chief? : :: Keep trying. You just make yourself look stupid, but then that would :: seem to be your sole core competency. : :: :: How long are you going to be in that coop job at NASA before you have :: :: to go back to school, El Chimpo? :: : :: :Funny you mention that as I'm getting my second technical BS degree right :: :now! : :: They don't give real degrees in BS, El Chimpo. : :Bachelor of Science, but you knew that. With you one can never be sure of things like that. :: :Already have an MS in computer systems management. : :: In other words, you don't know how to do anything. : :If that is the case then you're actually negatively inclined. You needed to get a MASTERS to manage computer systems? :: :I'll put my resume' up against yours any time, McClod. : :: I'm sure you would. Resume inflation is alive and well and I'd bet :: yours REALLY blows.... : :...yours away. You can leave off the 'away' and just blow me, El Chimpo. sneer :: :: :: :Get out of t he closet, Fred, you'll feel better about yourself. :: :: :: :: :: :: No matter how you beg, you're not my type, El Chimpo. I don't date :: :: :: outside the human species. :: :: : :: :: :I doubt you date as much as you stalk... :: : :: :: But then, you seem to 'doubt' most of reality. Tighten down that :: :: tinfoil beanie, El Chimpo.... :: : :: :You changing into an alien? : :: Compared to you, certainly. I'm sure any human being is an alien :: species to whatever the hell you are. : :Poor McClod, poke a stick at him and he barks like a scared dog. It really :must be tough being you. Yeah, it's hard living in a big house, driving a sportscar, and making a lot of money. I'm all broken up about it. -- "You have all the characteristics of a popular politician: a horrible voice, bad breeding, and a vulgar manner." -- Aristophanes
|
|
#234
June 6th 06, 04:03 PM
posted to sci.space.policy,alt.conspiracy,sci.space.history
|
|||
|
|||
|
Drudge: Spy satellites watch Americans from space
(Eric Chomko) wrote:
:Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: : :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: : :: :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: :: : :: :: :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: :: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: :: :: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :: :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :: :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :Maybe it has to do with telling employers that they can't turn America :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :into Mexico, by paying people too little. :: :: :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :But I know that this is too deep a concept for you... :: :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :: :: There is only so much money in each business to pay labor with. Higher :: :: :: :: :: :: :: labor costs per hour mean some businesses (and jobs) go away. :: :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :: :Not according to the Bush tax cut plan. That's the whole point of cutting :: :: :: :: :: :: :taxes, so jobs DON'T go away. :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :: You DO realize there is no connection between your first remark and :: :: :: :: :: :: this one, right? :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :Wrong! The whole point of cutting taxes is so business can grow, thus more :: :: :: :: :: :jobs. If I'm wrong, then why cut taxes? So you and I can spend $400 more?!? :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: And the connection to forcing up minimum wages because business is :: :: :: :: :: "paying people too little" is? :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :To give incentive for people to continue to work and not leave the country :: :: :: :: :for greener grass. Look at Mexico, if they DID have a minimum wage then :: :: :: :: :they wouldn't be crossing the border in droves to your ire. Or do you like :: :: :: :: :that sort of thing so as to give the unions fits? :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: Jesus, try READING THE WORDS, Eric. Let me try again. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: What is the connection to forcing up minimum wages because business is :: :: :: :: "paying people too little" and tax cuts? :: :: :: : :: :: :: :Tax cuts are to boost business. :: :: :: :: :: :: Well, you got that much right. :: :: : :: :: :That is the theory anyway. :: : :: :: Yep. It's generally the reality, too. :: : :: :Are you going to claim econmics is an exact science like physics and :: :chemistry? : :: Nope. You having to make **** up and pretend I've said it so you have :: something to argue with, again? : :: :Social science, McClod. Trends, etc. Not pure cause and effect. : :: Go back and read my actual words again, El Chimpo. Then ask someone :: to explain them to you. : :: :: :: :Minimum wage hikes are to keep the :: :: :: :business owners from making much more than their workers. :: :: :: :: :: :: Got that one wrong, and stupidly wrong at that. :: :: : :: :: :Why have a minimum wage? What is the economic reason for it? :: : :: :: There is no economic reason for it. In fact, economic reasoning would :: :: indicate they are a BAD idea. :: : :: :****ing off the work force into sense of apatahy might not fit neatly into :: :your economic number scheme, but any thinking person undertands the :: :humanistic part of keeping you work force happy. Or do you think slavery :: :shoud be reinstated for economic reasons? : :: I see you're once again making **** up and then lying to pretend I :: said it so you have something to argue with. : :: Go get an education, El Chimpo. : :I have three damn degrees! I think you need a lesson in life. Three degrees and still an idiot who has learned nothing. You appear to be suffering from having been educated in the system envisioned by C. Wright Mills. [Why do I think that Eric is going to fail to understand that remark?] :: :: Minimum Wage laws are a SOCIAL policy, not an economic one. :: : :: :So what? Sociology has economic factors and reprecussions. : :: But that doesn't make social policy "sociology". Nor does it make it :: "economic policy". : :: :You're just too :: :dimwitted to actually see it. That is why you're a conservative and by :: :default at that. You didn't choose it, it chose you! : :: Why don't you run along and learn what "sociology" is. : :I know plenty about it. You conceal your knowledge well. :In fact, the term "Power Elite" is a sociological :term. Well, no. The term 'power elite' is an invented notion used as a book title. :I suggest you read a book written by a sociologist (C. Wright :Mills), which you refuse to do. Then you lecture me about getting an :education about sociology? When you think 'social policy' and 'sociology' are the same thing, as you claim above, you bet I suggest you get an education. :You're not qualified to talk down to me, sonny. No, I'd have to get a lobotomy to get stupid enough to merely talk down to you. :: Hint: It has nothing to do with "social policy", any more than :: anthropology has to do with ants. : :: :: :: :The relationship :: :: :: :is indirectly related. :: :: : :: :: :: So indirectly related as to be totally disconnected. In other words, :: :: :: you still have not answered my question and I think you've :: :: :: demonstrated that this is due to an inability on your part to do so. :: :: :: :: :: :: :Also, boosting minimum wage generates more tax :: :: :: :revenue. :: :: :: :: :: :: How's that work, again? You're not stupidly assuming that business :: :: :: keep the same number of employees if they have to pay more for them, :: :: :: are you? :: :: : :: :: :If business is growing they do. :: : :: :: You don't make business grow by artificially increasing their costs :: :: for social policy purposes. :: : :: :Right, so the answer is anarchy. Oh, no? Then start with govt. and taxes :: :and let's see where we go from there. : :: This is your idea of a reply? It's so sad. You don't even understand :: the issues under discussion, do you? : :Why don't you clarify them and stop acting coy? Do you think you can :honestly contribute something here? Then do it... You can lead El Chimpo to knowledge, but you cannot make him THINK. :: :: :You're coming from a point if staying the :: :: :same and shrinking, not from a growing buisness, which is what the tax :: :: :cuts were all about in the first place. :: : :: :: It doesn't matter what you assume. If you artificially increase my :: :: labor costs, I will either employ fewer people and try to up their :: :: productivity or I will employ the same number of people and lose :: :: money. :: : :: :Or expand your business. : :: With what? Your expenses were just artificially raised for the :: business you have. What do you expand it WITH? : :Create capital by taking on venture capitalists as partners, get a loan, :etc. There are plenty of ways to raise money. There are plenty of ways to LOSE money. Why would someone go out to a venture capitalist to raise money to expand a business that has just been made LESS profitable by government fiat? :: :Why did you leave the last option out? : :: Because "expanding your business" isn't a magical incantation. If you :: expand your business you either need more of those artificially high :: priced workers or the ones you have need to be more productive. : :Right, but it happens all over the country every single day. Examples are :endless. Sure, businesses fail, what, 9 out of 10. It is the 10th one that :you must bank on. And that 10th one isn't generally employing a lot of people at minimum wage. :: Mere expansion does nothing for you. : :Seems to work for corporations. ROFLMAO! :: :You do kno :: :what ROI is, right? What is done with it? : :: Yes, I do. You do know that the 'I' stands for, right? You do :: understand that when costs are artificially elevated that it takes :: more 'I' to get a given 'R', right? : :That's why you see "Made in China" everywhere these days. Well, I'm pleased you agree (although I'm sure you don't mean to). So, if only government wasn't artificially elevating expenses in the US through things like minimum wage laws you believe that many of those low skill jobs would have stayed right here in the US instead of the end products being imported from places like China? That's what you just agreed above. :But, I'm sure :you blame the unions and their high labor costs for that. Yes, well you're sure of all sorts of non-operative 'facts'. Certainly artificially elevated union wages are part of the problem. Might I suggest you spend some time studying the history of organized labour and how it works in this country? That its goals and aims are, etc. :: Or maybe you don't. You come across pretty stupid so far, after all. : :You're not qualified to talk down to me, sonny. And I refuse to get a lobotomy to become stupid enough to merely talk down to you. :: :: :: :: :Hard to say where you GOPers are from time to time as you argue one point :: :: :: :: :against another without any clue of the cause and effect that both issues :: :: :: :: :share. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: I'm right where I've always been. Your problem seems to be an :: :: :: :: inability to read and simply respond rather than bleating and flaming. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :You're a right winger that tends to be wrong. :: :: :: :: :: :: And yet all you manage to do is make yourself look stupid and :: :: :: uninformed when you aren't being outright loony. :: :: : :: :: :Says you. You're the one that argues with everyone. Do you actually have a :: :: :friend? Or have you chased them all away, too? :: : :: :: Yes, now there's a cogent, well-reasoned reply. :: : :: :: I argue with idiots, not everyone. You're an idiot so it seems to you :: :: that I argue with everyone. :: : :: :The only idiot is the one who refuses to learn. : :: Like I said, I argue with idiots. You're an idiot, so it seems to you :: that I argue with everyone. : :I bet you argue with yourself in the mirror as well, too. You lose. Shall I tell you where to send the money? :: :That one is you. You really think you know it all. : :: No, I just know so much more of it than you do that it seems that way :: from your perspective. : :Just more full of it, scrub... Yes, you're SO good at actually supporting your positions. snicker :: :: :: :You confuse being poltically :: :: :: :right with being correct (right, as a psychological assessment). :: :: :: :: :: :: No, I confuse being "right where I've always been" as equating to "my :: :: :: position remains what it has always been" rather than spinning off :: :: :: into whatever fantasy world you're reading it in to use other :: :: :: definitions of 'right'. :: :: : :: :: :What you admit to is that you're consistent with your position, which is :: :: ften wrong.:: : :: :: You're lying again. :: : :: :And you're backpeddling like a wimp again. : :: Let's play horse. I'll be the front end and you be yourself. : :I picture you more as a jackass. Yes, well we've already established that reality doesn't intrude up where you keep your head, haven't we? :: :: :IOW, you're not open and will tend to always believe what you :: :: :initially believe never challenging your own position and beliefs. :: : :: :: You're lying again. :: : :: :Wimp. Sorry that thinking hurts your brain. : :: Lie and then deny. Yeah, REAL impressive, El Chimpo. : :Anything you say, Fret McClod. Perhaps, La Chimpa, suits you better. Blah blah blah blah blah. :: :: :You :: :: :want to be right so badly that even when wrong you'll argue as if right :: :: :all along or try and change the subject to the point where the topic :: :: :changes. :: : :: :: You're lying again. :: : :: :Beaten too much as a child, Mclod? : :: Perhaps you were, but it's not an excuse for lying so much. : :: :: :We have ALL seem that charateristic in you, McClod. :: : :: :: Oh? When was the vote taken? Or do you just mean you and the turd in :: :: your pocket when you say 'we'? :: : :: :You use 'we' as well. : :: No, I don't use you at all. I doubt anyone can find a real use for :: you. : :Six billion people and the planet and I'm arguing with an asshole like :you... Now don't you feel stupid? You certainly would if reality intruded into your world even a little bit. :: :: :I just hope :: :: :you learn something other than to say the other person is wrong, nuts or :: :: :some other aspersion of negativity that you like to cast in light of :: :: :actual debate. :: : :: :: Perhaps you should try engaging in 'actual debate' for a change, Eric? :: : :: :: When you're wrong I'm going to say you're wrong. When you're nuts I'm :: :: going to say you're nuts. I'm sorry you find the truth so painful. :: : :: :You're entitled to your own opinion, McClod. When I tell you it's :: :meaningless I'll simply do it. Painful? You? Surely, you jest. I'm just :: :waiting until the time you killfile me again so I can again declare :: :victory over you once again. : :: If you think being not worth bothering with is a 'victory', you just :: go ahead and declare it. : :Better than claiming "liar, liar" like you do. Well, if you dislike being called a liar, Eric, perhaps you should stop lying? It would be a novel approach for you. :: :Some folks are here to learn, others to teach, others neither, so they are :: :to either be ignored, or trifled with as a form of entertainment. The :: :latter is YOU, McClod. : :: Do you speak any language that non-gibbering idiots can understand? :: Your post is an orgy of stultifying cacophonous verbal depravity; an :: exercise in literary impotence, and an offense to all of good taste :: and decency. : :Yet are still a pompous ass overwhelmed with your own mediocrity. Don't look now, but you're starting to lose the ability to type complete sentences. Perhaps you should step back and blot before you short out your keyboard? :: :: :: Wait, that's not confusion. That's merely being correct. :: :: : :: :: :Sure whatever you say. If you're so clear and correct all the time, then :: :: :why all the anger? :: : :: :: What anger? Are you overestimating your own importance in the grand :: :: scheme of things again? :: : :: :Uh, because you do... :: : :: :If you ever met yourself it would be a really big fight. : :: You amaze me! I didn't think it was possible for one person to possess :: such a vast reservoir of undiluted gibberish! Is that a conclusion or :: simply the place where you got tired of thinking? : :I see that you strive for diluted gibberish. Yes, in that I interpose my remarks in between your gibberish, thus diluting it. :: :: :: :Fred, your last sentence is a laughable joke, especially coming from you. :: :: :: :: :: :: Tu quoqe fallacy. Your problem still seems to be an inability to read :: :: :: and simply respond rather than bleating and flaming. :: :: : :: :: :Bleating and flaming? Ha, you confuse laughter and wit... :: : :: :: Nope. Laughter is what I do at you. Wit is what you lack. No :: :: confusion at all. :: : :: :Okay, whatwver you say... snicker : :: And they said you were unteachable.... : :The proverbial 'they'... And the adverbial 'you'... :: :: :: :: :: :: :: But I know that this is too deep a concept for you... :: :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :: :No, it's you that's operating from scarcity again. Try abundance, though :: :: :: :: :: :: :it's a new concept for you. :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :: The only thing you seem to have an 'abundance' of is stupidity, Eric. :: :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: :But I and others keep pointing out the flaws in your "logic", so I won't be :: :: :: :: :: :emulating you anytime soon. :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :: The only thing you ever 'point out' is your own ass, Eric. :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: :Not to you Fred, as I'd likely bet that when you cheat on your wife it's :: :: :: :: :with another man. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: I'm divorced and no matter how much you beg I wouldn't give you a :: :: :: :: tumble, even if you do ever actually grow up to be a man. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :I'm not surprised you're divorced. :: :: :: :: :: :: I'm not surprised at your charm and poise. :: :: : :: :: :What comes around goes around. Why do you expect poise and charm when you :: :: :dish out mean spiritedness? :: : :: :: I don't from you. You continue to live down to my expectations. :: : :: ue to your low expectations. If you had high ones you'd see me that way:: :as well. Too bad your a half-empty-glass sort of guy. : :: Nope. I'm the optimistic sort. I'm sure you'll make an even bigger :: ass of yourself, given the opportunity. : :Which really means squat other than to you. See what I mean? :: :Where you get mad at liberals like me, I laugh at conservatives like you. :: :  : :: Uh, El Chimpo? It's USENET, dude. Nobody sane gets mad about :: blithering ****ants like you. : :You give reason to question your sanity. Only insofar as I waste time with you. It's rather like watching a traffic accident, wondering just how big a rhetorical 'wreck' you'll create with your senseless maundering replies. El Chimpo, you would be out of your depth in a parking lot puddle. You are obviously suffering from Clue Deficit Disorder. Have you ever noticed that whenever you sit behind a keyboard, some idiot starts typing? You bring to mind a quote from Josh Billing: "Doesn't know much, but leads the league in nostril hair." :: :: :Try kindness and see. :: : :: :: 'Kindness'? Is poor little Eric feeling picked upon? :: : :: :No, it is about you not me... : :: I'm busy trying to imagine you with a personality. Maybe you'd be less :: boring once I got to know you, but I don't want to take that chance. :: Any friend of yours is a lousy judge of character. : :Coming form you, that is just perfect. I'd really get worried if you said :I was a great guy. So would I, but for a much different reason. :: :: Try logic, reason, and fact, Eric. Start with any one of the three :: :: and work your way up to the combination. :: : :: :The fact that you think I don't do that says more about you than it does :: :about me. : :: Yes. It says I'm a keen observer of the obvious - like your obvious :: deficiencies. : :My deficiencies are stronger than your strengths. And your odor is stronger than my nose.... :: :: o you mistake kindness with weakness? One:: :: :wonders... :: : :: :: Well, at least you ditched that turd in your pocket.... :: : :: :Is that how you viewed you marriage? : :: Nope. : :: :Maybe your spouse's view... : :: Probably, if she ever came across you. : :: :Why do I get the impression she's is trying to get as much out of you as :: ossible?: :: Because you're even stupider than I was giving you credit for? : :Yeah, yeah... Wow, another biting intellectual response! Is it starting to sink in why so many have the opinion of you that they do, El Chimpo? :: -- :: "Well, I think we ought to let him hang there. Let him twist :: slowly, slowly in the wind." :: -- John Ehrlichman : :Who did Ehrlichman say this about? Nixon or was it Dick Helms? Reduced to commenting on .sigs now? Gee, what clueless behaviour will be next for our El Chimpo? -- "He may look like an idiot and talk like an idiot but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." -- Groucho Marx
|
|
#235
June 6th 06, 06:06 PM
posted to sci.space.policy,alt.conspiracy,sci.space.history
|
|||
|
|||
|
Drudge: Spy satellites watch Americans from space
Fred J. McCall ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote: [...] : :: : : :: :What lie, Fred? You like calling others liars but fail to challenge your : :: wn beliefs. Maybe all these people that appear to you as liars, exist: :: :because you're truly screwed up? You ARE the only common entity in the : :: :eqaution, so... : : : :: You made the statement "George was party to starting a war for : :: profit". That statement is a lie. What SHOULD someone call you, if : :: not a liar? : : : :It isn't a lie. It is the truth. : No, Eric. Just because you're an ideological loon reality doesn't : bend for the rest of us just to suit you. : :What we don't know is if outting a CIA : :worker to spite her husband was done : That much is right. We don't even know if that was done. I mean, she : was routinely driving in and out of CIA HQ. Not much left to 'out'. Far cry from leaking the name to the press for all to read. : :as a means to get back at him for : :not playing along with the White House's scheme to make Saddam Hussien : :look like he was trying to buy uranium. We'll find that out next spring : :when Scooter Libby takes the stand. : You might want to go look at just what it is that Libby got charged : with. Again, just because you're an ideological loon you don't get : your own reality. We'll see what Libby gets away with next spring. : :: :No, Fred! Bush clearly stated that he has no intention to pull the troops : :: ut while he is president and further than another president will have to: :: :do it. : : : :: Cite? Not for your attempted rephrase (which is also a sufficient : :: distortion to qualify as a lie) but for your original claim that "he : :: made the claim that he won't pull out the troops at all for any : :: reason". : : : :..the decision will be for future leaders (in Iraq and America) toi : :decide. : : : :: I'd think that would be easy to point to if he'd ever said it. : : : :: You're a liar, El Chimpo. : : : :Fred, You call anyone a liar when they point out a truth that hurts you. : No, Eric. I call anyone a liar WHEN THEY TELL LIES. You make it seem that you're a lie detector. Trust me you don't have enough world expereince to go running around the world pretending to know truth from falsehood. Your beliefs are simply to bias to the right. And that ain't no lie... : :It is yet another one of your childish traits. "Liar, liar, pants on : :fire." (LLPOF). You and Guth... hahahahaha : I'll simply note your inability to provide even a single cite to back : up your lying remarks above. Try as you might, scratching away madly : isn't going to cover that over, Eric. How did you manage to type so much and yet say so little? : :: :: :That being nearly three years before he's out of office. I : :: :: :do. Why make a comment like that? It is obvious that the war and nothing : :: :: :else, including different forms of energy is Bush's sole commitment. : :: : : :: :: Please provide a credible cite for the statement you claim was made. : :: : : :: :And read the actual Bush quotes: : :: :http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...21_bush22.html : : : :: It says nothing remotely like what you claim has been said. Try : :: again, liar. : : : :Bull****! You read it. This part: : :'Asked at a White House news conference whether there will come a time no : :U.S. forces are in Iraq, he said, "That will be decided by future : residents and future governments of Iraq."': Oh, I see. Your problem is you simply cannot read. You're in denial now. : :Remote? He's unwilling to even consider a timetable. That means the troops : :are there until his successor pulls them out! And he stated it nearly 3 : :years before he leaves office. : Or perhaps he simply recognizes, given how things look right now, that : the job won't be done next week. No, he's leaving them in and allowing the DOD budget to swell as per the GOP's desire to make it their social program. : Even at that he said nothing remotely resembling what you claimed in : your lies, above. Yep, more denial. : :: :: :: :Get a Democrat in there and see what happens with hybrids : :: :: :: :and gasohol. : :: :: :: : :: :: :: We had a Democrat in there for 8 years before Bush. What happened : :: :: :: with hybrids and gasohol, El Chimpo? : :: :: : : :: :: :Gas was just over a buck a gallon back then. Now it's $3 a gallon. : :: : : :: :: Gas hit a historical high in constant dollar terms under Carter : :: :: (another Democrat). What did HE do? : :: : : :: :Tried to use gasohol but was blocked. : : : :: Wrong. You're lying again. : : : :Ok, why didn't gasohol take off like Carter wanted back in the late 70s? : Uh, Eric? You do realize that 'gasohol' is an AIR POLLUTION measure, : not a petroleum conservation measure, right? Both. : Uh, Eric? You are aware that 'gasohol' is widely used in many places, : aren't you? What percentage is gasohol used as compared to regular gas, nationwide? : Uh, Eric? You're aware that Carter didn't even START funding research : into 'gasohol' until 1980 (cmsn under Birch Bayh), aren't you? : Uh, Eric? You know that it wasn't until January of 1981, just before : he left office, that Carter ordered Federal vehicles and that even : that was a pretty weak order, aren't you? : "By the authority vested in me as President of the United States of : America by Section 271 of the Energy Security Act (94 Stat. 710; : Public Law 96-294; 42 U.S.C. 8871), in order to require Federal : agencies which own or lease motor vehicles to use gasohol in those : vehicles which are capable of operating on gasohol where it is : available at reasonable prices and in reasonable quantities,..." Carter spoke about gasohol and coal use way back when he was running for president. The fact that the powers-at-be threw him a bone while they were working on throwing him out of office doesn't surprise me in the least. Do you think George H.W. Bush simply went away when Carter replaced him with Stansfield Turned as DCI? : :: :Tried to get hostages out or Iraq, : :: :too, but was blocked. : : : :: Wrong. He was inept. It's not the same thing. : : : :False. We was working against a team of Republicans working under the : :table with the Iranians. : Cite? Or is this just something else you made up out of your own : private reality? It's called 'October Surprise', look it up. But since no one was indicted it never happened, right McClod? : :: :Then when the deal with the hostage-takers was made : :: :by Bush's daddy, they were freed the same day Reagan took office. The : :: :latter is treason, BTW. : : : :: Wrong. You're lying again. : : : :Says you. Truth hurts doesn't it McClod? You were in the Navy, did you : :spend your entire stint with your head up your butt? : Truth feels fine. It's your own private delusions that 'hurt'. I was : in the Gulf when the Iranians took our embassy, El Chimpo. Had the : better part of you run down your momma's leg by then? I was in college back then. : Even if your delusions were true it wouldn't be "treason", you : dumbass. Go read up what it takes for something to constitute treason : in the United States. Sure it would. Making a deal with the enemy to further your party interests over those of the United States is treason. Or is sure as hell should be! : Gods, you're as big an idiot as those right wing loons who are always : screeching 'treason' over this or that. Right wing loons? Coming from you that's a laugh. You, the big socialist. When convenient, no doubt. Mercenary mentality. : :: :: :So you : :: :: :have a situation where we should be looking for alternate forms of energy : :: :: :due to high gas prices but since a friend of Big Oil is in the WH nothing : :: :: :gets done and they get richer. : :: : : :: :: No, we just have a situation where people like you lie. : :: : : :: :Translation: Fred claiming someone is a liar really means he's too : :: :clueless to understand the situation at hand. : : : :: Wrong. You're lying again. : : : :LLPOF!!!! : I'll simply note all the factual support Eric offers for his own : personal delusions and let it go at that. You're a victim of your own beliefs in a most anal retentive way. : :: :: :: And just by the way, I'm not talking about gasohol (which we use : :: :: :: around here and have for a long time). I'm talking about 80% ethanol : :: :: :: fuel REPLACING gasoline as a fuel, not just 10% being used as an : :: :: :: oxidizing agent in gasohol. : :: :: : : :: :: :Not with your boy in the WH... : :: : : :: :: Pull your head out and check the facts, El Chimpo. You're lying : :: :: again. : :: : : :: :Provide a cite where Bush has done more for alternative forms of energy as : :: :compared to what Carter tried.... : : : :: See the 2005 State of the Union address. : : : :Now THOSE were lies... : In other words, you ask for a cite and then when you get one simply : pretend it didn't happen. He spoke about lots of stuff but didn't deliver. : It's bad enough that you're a raving loon, El Chimpo, but it's even : worse that you simply don't allow ANY reality to intrude. : :: Yeah, sure. I flush better brains than you'll ever have, **** for : :: brains. : : : :Too bad your life formula has produce a bitter old man. : Yeah, I'm real bitter, Eric. Why, I just feel horrible every day : leaving my 2500 square foot home and driving my Mercedes roadster : (fueled by gasohol for a big part of the year, just by the way) in to : work every day. : Yeah, it's enough to make one bitter. : snicker Yeah, you got it made... I own two houses and my car is a gas guzzling SUV (Honda Pilot) that mostly my wife drives. My vechicle is a Ford pickup truck because I'm not afraid to get my hands dirty. : :: :Funny you mention that as I'm getting my second technical BS degree right : :: :now! : : : :: They don't give real degrees in BS, El Chimpo. : : : :Bachelor of Science, but you knew that. : With you one can never be sure of things like that. Better for you to check yourself, it actually is more productive than worrying about the guy next to you. You don't get that, though. You'd rather focus your energy pointing out how so-and-so is wrong rather than improving yourself. And we ALL know and see that... : :: :Already have an MS in computer systems management. : : : :: In other words, you don't know how to do anything. : : : :If that is the case then you're actually negatively inclined. : You needed to get a MASTERS to manage computer systems? Resources, people and information. Computer Systems Management is more than learning how to operate and use a computer. : :: :I'll put my resume' up against yours any time, McClod. : : : :: I'm sure you would. Resume inflation is alive and well and I'd bet : :: yours REALLY blows.... : : : :...yours away. : You can leave off the 'away' and just blow me, El Chimpo. : sneer I think your boyfriend would be jealous... : :: :: :: :Get out of t he closet, Fred, you'll feel better about yourself. : :: :: :: : :: :: :: No matter how you beg, you're not my type, El Chimpo. I don't date : :: :: :: outside the human species. : :: :: : : :: :: :I doubt you date as much as you stalk... : :: : : :: :: But then, you seem to 'doubt' most of reality. Tighten down that : :: :: tinfoil beanie, El Chimpo.... : :: : : :: :You changing into an alien? : : : :: Compared to you, certainly. I'm sure any human being is an alien : :: species to whatever the hell you are. : : : :Poor McClod, poke a stick at him and he barks like a scared dog. It really : :must be tough being you. : Yeah, it's hard living in a big house, driving a sportscar, and making : a lot of money. You fogort the part about being miserable as hell. Possessions are't squat, McClod. You took the whole Madonna's "Material Girl" thing to heart didn't you? Money can't buy love, McClod. : I'm all broken up about it. Shallow, I think is the word you're mission here. Eric : -- : "You have all the characteristics of a popular politician: a : horrible voice, bad breeding, and a vulgar manner." : -- Aristophanes
|
|
#236
June 6th 06, 06:34 PM
posted to sci.space.policy,alt.conspiracy,sci.space.history
|
|||
|
|||
|
Drudge: Spy satellites watch Americans from space
|
|
#237
June 7th 06, 02:42 AM
posted to sci.space.history
|
|||
|
|||
|
Drudge: Spy satellites watch Americans from space
On Tue, 16 May 2006 12:45:11 GMT, "Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)"
wrote: You know better than to argue from a false dichotomy. ....Are you kidding? He majored in false dichotomies! It's all he knows! OM -- ]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[
|
|
#238
June 7th 06, 05:01 AM
posted to sci.space.policy,alt.conspiracy,sci.space.history
|
|||
|
|||
|
Drudge: Spy satellites watch Americans from space
(Eric Chomko) wrote:
:Fred J. McCall ) wrote: :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: :[...] :: :: : :: :: :What lie, Fred? You like calling others liars but fail to challenge your :: :: wn beliefs. Maybe all these people that appear to you as liars, exist:: :: :because you're truly screwed up? You ARE the only common entity in the :: :: :eqaution, so... :: : :: :: You made the statement "George was party to starting a war for :: :: profit". That statement is a lie. What SHOULD someone call you, if :: :: not a liar? :: : :: :It isn't a lie. It is the truth. : :: No, Eric. Just because you're an ideological loon reality doesn't :: bend for the rest of us just to suit you. : :: :What we don't know is if outting a CIA :: :worker to spite her husband was done : :: That much is right. We don't even know if that was done. I mean, she :: was routinely driving in and out of CIA HQ. Not much left to 'out'. : :Far cry from leaking the name to the press for all to read. Still no evidence that anyone in the White House did that and no clear indication that it would be a crime if they did, since she was PUBLICLY employed. :: :as a means to get back at him for :: :not playing along with the White House's scheme to make Saddam Hussien :: :look like he was trying to buy uranium. We'll find that out next spring :: :when Scooter Libby takes the stand. : :: You might want to go look at just what it is that Libby got charged :: with. Again, just because you're an ideological loon you don't get :: your own reality. : :We'll see what Libby gets away with next spring. Go read the charges, Eric. :: :: :No, Fred! Bush clearly stated that he has no intention to pull the troops :: :: ut while he is president and further than another president will have to:: :: :do it. :: : :: :: Cite? Not for your attempted rephrase (which is also a sufficient :: :: distortion to qualify as a lie) but for your original claim that "he :: :: made the claim that he won't pull out the troops at all for any :: :: reason". :: : :: :..the decision will be for future leaders (in Iraq and America) toi :: :decide. :: : :: :: I'd think that would be easy to point to if he'd ever said it. :: : :: :: You're a liar, El Chimpo. :: : :: :Fred, You call anyone a liar when they point out a truth that hurts you. : :: No, Eric. I call anyone a liar WHEN THEY TELL LIES. : :You make it seem that you're a lie detector. Trust me you don't have :enough world expereince to go running around the world pretending to know :truth from falsehood. That's really quite funny, coming from a tinfoil beanie cadet like you. :Your beliefs are simply to bias to the right. And :that ain't no lie... Oh? Remember the last time I offered you the chance to try to 'prove' that? Grown some balls since the last time we talked, has it? Or will you swallow your words again like the lies they are? :: :It is yet another one of your childish traits. "Liar, liar, pants on :: :fire." (LLPOF). You and Guth... hahahahaha : :: I'll simply note your inability to provide even a single cite to back :: up your lying remarks above. Try as you might, scratching away madly :: isn't going to cover that over, Eric. : :How did you manage to type so much and yet say so little? I'll simply note your inability to provide even a single cite to back up your lying remarks above. Try as you might, scratching away madly isn't going to cover that over, Eric. Let me make it simple for you: If it's true, you can point to a cite. Since you do not and try to obfuscate and misdirect, instead, it's clear that you cannot. Liar. :: :: :: :That being nearly three years before he's out of office. I :: :: :: :do. Why make a comment like that? It is obvious that the war and nothing :: :: :: :else, including different forms of energy is Bush's sole commitment. :: :: : :: :: :: Please provide a credible cite for the statement you claim was made. :: :: : :: :: :And read the actual Bush quotes: :: :: :http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...21_bush22.html :: : :: :: It says nothing remotely like what you claim has been said. Try :: :: again, liar. :: : :: :Bull****! You read it. This part: :: :'Asked at a White House news conference whether there will come a time no :: :U.S. forces are in Iraq, he said, "That will be decided by future :: residents and future governments of Iraq."': :: Oh, I see. Your problem is you simply cannot read. : :You're in denial now. Go read what you claim was said. Then go read what was actually said. You're a liar, Eric. Even worse, you're an obvious and untalented liar. :: :Remote? He's unwilling to even consider a timetable. That means the troops :: :are there until his successor pulls them out! And he stated it nearly 3 :: :years before he leaves office. : :: Or perhaps he simply recognizes, given how things look right now, that :: the job won't be done next week. : :No, he's leaving them in and allowing the DOD budget to swell as per the :GOP's desire to make it their social program. Cite? You're attributing motives for a statement that was never made. Liar. :: Even at that he said nothing remotely resembling what you claimed in :: your lies, above. : :Yep, more denial. Liar. :: :: :: :: :Get a Democrat in there and see what happens with hybrids :: :: :: :: :and gasohol. :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: We had a Democrat in there for 8 years before Bush. What happened :: :: :: :: with hybrids and gasohol, El Chimpo? :: :: :: : :: :: :: :Gas was just over a buck a gallon back then. Now it's $3 a gallon. :: :: : :: :: :: Gas hit a historical high in constant dollar terms under Carter :: :: :: (another Democrat). What did HE do? :: :: : :: :: :Tried to use gasohol but was blocked. :: : :: :: Wrong. You're lying again. :: : :: :Ok, why didn't gasohol take off like Carter wanted back in the late 70s? : :: Uh, Eric? You do realize that 'gasohol' is an AIR POLLUTION measure, :: not a petroleum conservation measure, right? : :Both. Wrong. You do understand that you get WORSE mileage on 'gasohol' than you do on 100% gasoline, right? :: Uh, Eric? You are aware that 'gasohol' is widely used in many places, :: aren't you? : :What percentage is gasohol used as compared to regular gas, nationwide? Eric, you ignorant slut. Gasohol is used places and times when OXYGENATED FUELS are required to lower air pollution. It is not, repeat, IS NOT, a way to try and reduce dependence on oil. You are merely confused. :: Uh, Eric? You're aware that Carter didn't even START funding research :: into 'gasohol' until 1980 (cmsn under Birch Bayh), aren't you? : :: Uh, Eric? You know that it wasn't until January of 1981, just before :: he left office, that Carter ordered Federal vehicles and that even :: that was a pretty weak order, aren't you? : :: "By the authority vested in me as President of the United States of :: America by Section 271 of the Energy Security Act (94 Stat. 710; :: Public Law 96-294; 42 U.S.C. 8871), in order to require Federal :: agencies which own or lease motor vehicles to use gasohol in those :: vehicles which are capable of operating on gasohol where it is :: available at reasonable prices and in reasonable quantities,..." : :Carter spoke about gasohol and coal use way back when he was running for resident. The fact that the powers-at-be threw him a bone while they:were working on throwing him out of office doesn't surprise me in the :least. Do you think George H.W. Bush simply went away when Carter replaced :him with Stansfield Turned as DCI? Eric, you're obviously wearing that tinfoil beanie WAY too tight... :: :: :Tried to get hostages out or Iraq, :: :: :too, but was blocked. :: : :: :: Wrong. He was inept. It's not the same thing. :: : :: :False. We was working against a team of Republicans working under the :: :table with the Iranians. : :: Cite? Or is this just something else you made up out of your own :: private reality? : :It's called 'October Surprise', look it up. But since no one was indicted :it never happened, right McClod? Since your total proof seems to consist of your willingness to bleat stupid opinions, I think I'll pass. Thanks all the same. :: :: :Then when the deal with the hostage-takers was made :: :: :by Bush's daddy, they were freed the same day Reagan took office. The :: :: :latter is treason, BTW. :: : :: :: Wrong. You're lying again. :: : :: :Says you. Truth hurts doesn't it McClod? You were in the Navy, did you :: :spend your entire stint with your head up your butt? : :: Truth feels fine. It's your own private delusions that 'hurt'. I was :: in the Gulf when the Iranians took our embassy, El Chimpo. Had the :: better part of you run down your momma's leg by then? : :I was in college back then. And you're just now graduating? My, you ARE bright. snicker :: Even if your delusions were true it wouldn't be "treason", you :: dumbass. Go read up what it takes for something to constitute treason :: in the United States. : :Sure it would. Making a deal with the enemy to further your party :interests over those of the United States is treason. Even if true (and you're a long way from there), it wouldn't be. :Or is sure as hell should be! Then Clinton should have been hanged over the whole China connection and Kerry should have gotten the same for his ostensible contacts overseas, much touted during his attempted run at the Presidency. :: Gods, you're as big an idiot as those right wing loons who are always :: screeching 'treason' over this or that. : :Right wing loons? Coming from you that's a laugh. You, the big socialist. :When convenient, no doubt. Mercenary mentality. Eric, do you EVER pull your head out of your ass? :: :: :: :So you :: :: :: :have a situation where we should be looking for alternate forms of energy :: :: :: :due to high gas prices but since a friend of Big Oil is in the WH nothing :: :: :: :gets done and they get richer. :: :: : :: :: :: No, we just have a situation where people like you lie. :: :: : :: :: :Translation: Fred claiming someone is a liar really means he's too :: :: :clueless to understand the situation at hand. :: : :: :: Wrong. You're lying again. :: : :: :LLPOF!!!! : :: I'll simply note all the factual support Eric offers for his own :: personal delusions and let it go at that. : :You're a victim of your own beliefs in a most anal retentive way. I'll simply note all the factual support Eric offers for his own personal delusions and let it go at that. :: :: :: :: And just by the way, I'm not talking about gasohol (which we use :: :: :: :: around here and have for a long time). I'm talking about 80% ethanol :: :: :: :: fuel REPLACING gasoline as a fuel, not just 10% being used as an :: :: :: :: oxidizing agent in gasohol. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :Not with your boy in the WH... :: :: : :: :: :: Pull your head out and check the facts, El Chimpo. You're lying :: :: :: again. :: :: : :: :: :Provide a cite where Bush has done more for alternative forms of energy as :: :: :compared to what Carter tried.... :: : :: :: See the 2005 State of the Union address. :: : :: :Now THOSE were lies... : :: In other words, you ask for a cite and then when you get one simply :: pretend it didn't happen. : :He spoke about lots of stuff but didn't deliver. Wrong. You must really work hard to maintain your ignorance about these things, Eric. :: It's bad enough that you're a raving loon, El Chimpo, but it's even :: worse that you simply don't allow ANY reality to intrude. : :: :: Yeah, sure. I flush better brains than you'll ever have, **** for :: :: brains. :: : :: :Too bad your life formula has produce a bitter old man. : :: Yeah, I'm real bitter, Eric. Why, I just feel horrible every day :: leaving my 2500 square foot home and driving my Mercedes roadster :: (fueled by gasohol for a big part of the year, just by the way) in to :: work every day. : :: Yeah, it's enough to make one bitter. : :: snicker : :Yeah, you got it made... : :I own two houses and my car is a gas guzzling SUV (Honda Pilot) that :mostly my wife drives. My vechicle is a Ford pickup truck because I'm not :afraid to get my hands dirty. And yet here you are bleating about gasoline and all that while your wife drives an SUV. Why, how Kerry-esque of you. Assuming, of course, that anyone believes you. Why do I suspect that if I'd said I owned two houses (and I did for a while) that you'd have owned three and your wife would be driving an RV? snicker :: :: :Funny you mention that as I'm getting my second technical BS degree right :: :: :now! :: : :: :: They don't give real degrees in BS, El Chimpo. :: : :: :Bachelor of Science, but you knew that. : :: With you one can never be sure of things like that. : :Better for you to check yourself, it actually is more productive than :worrying about the guy next to you. You don't get that, though. You'd :rather focus your energy pointing out how so-and-so is wrong rather than :improving yourself. And we ALL know and see that... Only when "so-and-so" is a bleating idiot like you, El Chimpo. :: :: :Already have an MS in computer systems management. :: : :: :: In other words, you don't know how to do anything. :: : :: :If that is the case then you're actually negatively inclined. : :: You needed to get a MASTERS to manage computer systems? : :Resources, people and information. Computer Systems Management is more :than learning how to operate and use a computer. I sort of know that, El Chimpo. It's still hardly something it takes a Masters degree to do. One of the best people I ever knew at it walked out of his BA degree 4 hours short of finishing. You wouldn't believe the hoops that had to be jumped through once that percolated up and they found out what job he was in. :: :: :I'll put my resume' up against yours any time, McClod. :: : :: :: I'm sure you would. Resume inflation is alive and well and I'd bet :: :: yours REALLY blows.... :: : :: :...yours away. : :: You can leave off the 'away' and just blow me, El Chimpo. : :: sneer : :I think your boyfriend would be jealous... You think anyone would be jealous of you? You having delusions of adequacy again, El Chimpo? :: :: :: :: :Get out of t he closet, Fred, you'll feel better about yourself. :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: No matter how you beg, you're not my type, El Chimpo. I don't date :: :: :: :: outside the human species. :: :: :: : :: :: :: :I doubt you date as much as you stalk... :: :: : :: :: :: But then, you seem to 'doubt' most of reality. Tighten down that :: :: :: tinfoil beanie, El Chimpo.... :: :: : :: :: :You changing into an alien? :: : :: :: Compared to you, certainly. I'm sure any human being is an alien :: :: species to whatever the hell you are. :: : :: :Poor McClod, poke a stick at him and he barks like a scared dog. It really :: :must be tough being you. : :: Yeah, it's hard living in a big house, driving a sportscar, and making :: a lot of money. : :You fogort the part about being miserable as hell. Possessions are't :squat, McClod. You took the whole Madonna's "Material Girl" thing to heart :didn't you? Money can't buy love, McClod. Yeah. Usually the people who say that don't have any money. Perhaps you're right, but you know what? It'll sure let you shop for it in much nicer neighborhoods. :: I'm all broken up about it. : :Shallow, I think is the word you're mission here. Oh, you exaggerate. You don't think. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn
|
|
#239
June 7th 06, 06:57 PM
posted to sci.space.policy,alt.conspiracy,sci.space.history
|
|||
|
|||
|
Drudge: Spy satellites watch Americans from space
|
|
#240
June 7th 06, 07:30 PM
posted to sci.space.policy,alt.conspiracy,sci.space.history
|
|||
|
|||
|
Drudge: Spy satellites watch Americans from space
Fred J. McCall ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote: : :Fred J. McCall ) wrote: : :: (Eric Chomko) wrote: : :[...] : :: :: : : :: :: :What lie, Fred? You like calling others liars but fail to challenge your : :: :: wn beliefs. Maybe all these people that appear to you as liars, exist: :: :: :because you're truly screwed up? You ARE the only common entity in the : :: :: :eqaution, so... : :: : : :: :: You made the statement "George was party to starting a war for : :: :: profit". That statement is a lie. What SHOULD someone call you, if : :: :: not a liar? : :: : : :: :It isn't a lie. It is the truth. : : : :: No, Eric. Just because you're an ideological loon reality doesn't : :: bend for the rest of us just to suit you. : : : :: :What we don't know is if outting a CIA : :: :worker to spite her husband was done : : : :: That much is right. We don't even know if that was done. I mean, she : :: was routinely driving in and out of CIA HQ. Not much left to 'out'. : : : :Far cry from leaking the name to the press for all to read. : Still no evidence that anyone in the White House did that and no clear : indication that it would be a crime if they did, since she was : PUBLICLY employed. No just that the stories don't match when asked about who said what to whom. Smells of CYA. CIA employees names are not to be revealed despite the fact that they are in the government. For you to claim otherwise makes it quite clear ONI, despite that fact you claim to have been in the Navy, is just another acronym. If the CIA is so public, Fred, then why don't they publish their budget? I get that you're all about security and need-to-know only when it serves you and those you support. : :: :as a means to get back at him for : :: :not playing along with the White House's scheme to make Saddam Hussien : :: :look like he was trying to buy uranium. We'll find that out next spring : :: :when Scooter Libby takes the stand. : : : :: You might want to go look at just what it is that Libby got charged : :: with. Again, just because you're an ideological loon you don't get : :: your own reality. : : : :We'll see what Libby gets away with next spring. : Go read the charges, Eric. Lying. Why is he being held, Fred? Why isn't he at home? : :: :: :No, Fred! Bush clearly stated that he has no intention to pull the troops : :: :: ut while he is president and further than another president will have to: :: :: :do it. : :: : : :: :: Cite? Not for your attempted rephrase (which is also a sufficient : :: :: distortion to qualify as a lie) but for your original claim that "he : :: :: made the claim that he won't pull out the troops at all for any : :: :: reason". : :: : : :: :..the decision will be for future leaders (in Iraq and America) toi : :: :decide. : :: : : :: :: I'd think that would be easy to point to if he'd ever said it. : :: : : :: :: You're a liar, El Chimpo. : :: : : :: :Fred, You call anyone a liar when they point out a truth that hurts you. : : : :: No, Eric. I call anyone a liar WHEN THEY TELL LIES. : : : :You make it seem that you're a lie detector. Trust me you don't have : :enough world expereince to go running around the world pretending to know : :truth from falsehood. : That's really quite funny, coming from a tinfoil beanie cadet like : you. If we worked together, you'd be calling me sir. If it was the military, then I'd be returning your salutes. : :Your beliefs are simply to bias to the right. And : :that ain't no lie... : Oh? Remember the last time I offered you the chance to try to 'prove' : that? Grown some balls since the last time we talked, has it? Nothing has changed, expect maybe you for the worse. : Or will you swallow your words again like the lies they are? You're the coward of this dyad... : :: :It is yet another one of your childish traits. "Liar, liar, pants on : :: :fire." (LLPOF). You and Guth... hahahahaha : : : :: I'll simply note your inability to provide even a single cite to back : :: up your lying remarks above. Try as you might, scratching away madly : :: isn't going to cover that over, Eric. : : : :How did you manage to type so much and yet say so little? : I'll simply note your inability to provide even a single cite to back : up your lying remarks above. Try as you might, scratching away madly : isn't going to cover that over, Eric. : Let me make it simple for you: If it's true, you can point to a cite. : Since you do not and try to obfuscate and misdirect, instead, it's : clear that you cannot. : Liar. ....pants on fire. You're pathetic... : :: :: :: :That being nearly three years before he's out of office. I : :: :: :: :do. Why make a comment like that? It is obvious that the war and nothing : :: :: :: :else, including different forms of energy is Bush's sole commitment. : :: :: : : :: :: :: Please provide a credible cite for the statement you claim was made. : :: :: : : :: :: :And read the actual Bush quotes: : :: :: :http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...21_bush22.html : :: : : :: :: It says nothing remotely like what you claim has been said. Try : :: :: again, liar. : :: : : :: :Bull****! You read it. This part: : :: :'Asked at a White House news conference whether there will come a time no : :: :U.S. forces are in Iraq, he said, "That will be decided by future : :: residents and future governments of Iraq."': : : :: Oh, I see. Your problem is you simply cannot read. : : : :You're in denial now. : Go read what you claim was said. Then go read what was actually said. : You're a liar, Eric. Even worse, you're an obvious and untalented : liar. I did read it and presented a reference link. The fact that you're in denial doesn't make me a liar. Bush won't withdraw the troops and said he wouldn't. Pure and simple. Now stop being such a GOP apologist and try to understand the truth rather than mask it by calling others "liar" as you are so inclined to do. : :: :Remote? He's unwilling to even consider a timetable. That means the troops : :: :are there until his successor pulls them out! And he stated it nearly 3 : :: :years before he leaves office. : : : :: Or perhaps he simply recognizes, given how things look right now, that : :: the job won't be done next week. : : : :No, he's leaving them in and allowing the DOD budget to swell as per the : :GOP's desire to make it their social program. : Cite? You're attributing motives for a statement that was never made. Look at the DOD budget since Bush took office. : Liar. : :: Even at that he said nothing remotely resembling what you claimed in : :: your lies, above. : : : :Yep, more denial. : Liar. : :: :: :: :: :Get a Democrat in there and see what happens with hybrids : :: :: :: :: :and gasohol. : :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: We had a Democrat in there for 8 years before Bush. What happened : :: :: :: :: with hybrids and gasohol, El Chimpo? : :: :: :: : : :: :: :: :Gas was just over a buck a gallon back then. Now it's $3 a gallon. : :: :: : : :: :: :: Gas hit a historical high in constant dollar terms under Carter : :: :: :: (another Democrat). What did HE do? : :: :: : : :: :: :Tried to use gasohol but was blocked. : :: : : :: :: Wrong. You're lying again. : :: : : :: :Ok, why didn't gasohol take off like Carter wanted back in the late 70s? : : : :: Uh, Eric? You do realize that 'gasohol' is an AIR POLLUTION measure, : :: not a petroleum conservation measure, right? : : : :Both. : Wrong. You do understand that you get WORSE mileage on 'gasohol' than : you do on 100% gasoline, right? So, it comes from corn in th US rather than foriegn oil. : :: Uh, Eric? You are aware that 'gasohol' is widely used in many places, : :: aren't you? : : : :What percentage is gasohol used as compared to regular gas, nationwide? : Eric, you ignorant slut. Gasohol is used places and times when : OXYGENATED FUELS are required to lower air pollution. It is not, : repeat, IS NOT, a way to try and reduce dependence on oil. Why not? Because you say so? Sounds similar to the "there is no such thing as global warming" mantra you righties like to repeat ad nauseum. : You are merely confused. You do nothing to clarify. Why doesn't more gasohol make us less dependent on foriegn oil? Please elaborate. I mean, why not less pollution everywhere because of more gasohol and less fossil fuel? : :: Uh, Eric? You're aware that Carter didn't even START funding research : :: into 'gasohol' until 1980 (cmsn under Birch Bayh), aren't you? : : : :: Uh, Eric? You know that it wasn't until January of 1981, just before : :: he left office, that Carter ordered Federal vehicles and that even : :: that was a pretty weak order, aren't you? : : : :: "By the authority vested in me as President of the United States of : :: America by Section 271 of the Energy Security Act (94 Stat. 710; : :: Public Law 96-294; 42 U.S.C. 8871), in order to require Federal : :: agencies which own or lease motor vehicles to use gasohol in those : :: vehicles which are capable of operating on gasohol where it is : :: available at reasonable prices and in reasonable quantities,..." : : : :Carter spoke about gasohol and coal use way back when he was running for : resident. The fact that the powers-at-be threw him a bone while they: :were working on throwing him out of office doesn't surprise me in the : :least. Do you think George H.W. Bush simply went away when Carter replaced : :him with Stansfield Turned as DCI? : Eric, you're obviously wearing that tinfoil beanie WAY too tight... What did Bush Sr. do from 1976 to 1980 before becoming VP? Other than look for ways to derail the Carter administration? : :: :: :Tried to get hostages out or Iraq, : :: :: :too, but was blocked. : :: : : :: :: Wrong. He was inept. It's not the same thing. : :: : : :: :False. We was working against a team of Republicans working under the : :: :table with the Iranians. : : : :: Cite? Or is this just something else you made up out of your own : :: private reality? : : : :It's called 'October Surprise', look it up. But since no one was indicted : :it never happened, right McClod? : Since your total proof seems to consist of your willingness to bleat : stupid opinions, I think I'll pass. Thanks all the same. Worse than a liar you simply refuse to learn. You like keeping your head in the sand between the times you spew right wing propaganda. : :: :: :Then when the deal with the hostage-takers was made : :: :: :by Bush's daddy, they were freed the same day Reagan took office. The : :: :: :latter is treason, BTW. : :: : : :: :: Wrong. You're lying again. : :: : : :: :Says you. Truth hurts doesn't it McClod? You were in the Navy, did you : :: :spend your entire stint with your head up your butt? : : : :: Truth feels fine. It's your own private delusions that 'hurt'. I was : :: in the Gulf when the Iranians took our embassy, El Chimpo. Had the : :: better part of you run down your momma's leg by then? : : : :I was in college back then. : And you're just now graduating? My, you ARE bright. Graduating for the third time. In my field (computers) you must keep up with the times. So yes, McClod, I'm getting the same degree I got 25 years ago, but it is very diferent, due to the evolving field. : snicker Care to share your computer knowledge. : :: Even if your delusions were true it wouldn't be "treason", you : :: dumbass. Go read up what it takes for something to constitute treason : :: in the United States. : : : :Sure it would. Making a deal with the enemy to further your party : :interests over those of the United States is treason. : Even if true (and you're a long way from there), it wouldn't be. Yep, if it's not against the law then it can't be immoral unless it's about sex. THAT is the GOP right-wing way of thinking! : :Or is sure as hell should be! : Then Clinton should have been hanged over the whole China connection : and Kerry should have gotten the same for his ostensible contacts : overseas, much touted during his attempted run at the Presidency. China is our nation most favored WRT trade. Reagan did that. Yet as soon as it is missile technology the right-wingers who love cheap labor from China, go ballistic. No hypocrisy there!! If the Chinese are so bad, then we should trade with them period. Or, do terrorists nations get some sort of pass if they make happy meal toys? : :: Gods, you're as big an idiot as those right wing loons who are always : :: screeching 'treason' over this or that. : : : :Right wing loons? Coming from you that's a laugh. You, the big socialist. : :When convenient, no doubt. Mercenary mentality. : Eric, do you EVER pull your head out of your ass? Oh, I struck a nerve there no doubt. : :: :: :: :So you : :: :: :: :have a situation where we should be looking for alternate forms of energy : :: :: :: :due to high gas prices but since a friend of Big Oil is in the WH nothing : :: :: :: :gets done and they get richer. : :: :: : : :: :: :: No, we just have a situation where people like you lie. : :: :: : : :: :: :Translation: Fred claiming someone is a liar really means he's too : :: :: :clueless to understand the situation at hand. : :: : : :: :: Wrong. You're lying again. : :: : : :: :LLPOF!!!! : : : :: I'll simply note all the factual support Eric offers for his own : :: personal delusions and let it go at that. : : : :You're a victim of your own beliefs in a most anal retentive way. : I'll simply note all the factual support Eric offers for his own : personal delusions and let it go at that. Yet, you heed my advice by continuing to post. : :: :: :: :: And just by the way, I'm not talking about gasohol (which we use : :: :: :: :: around here and have for a long time). I'm talking about 80% ethanol : :: :: :: :: fuel REPLACING gasoline as a fuel, not just 10% being used as an : :: :: :: :: oxidizing agent in gasohol. : :: :: :: : : :: :: :: :Not with your boy in the WH... : :: :: : : :: :: :: Pull your head out and check the facts, El Chimpo. You're lying : :: :: :: again. : :: :: : : :: :: :Provide a cite where Bush has done more for alternative forms of energy as : :: :: :compared to what Carter tried.... : :: : : :: :: See the 2005 State of the Union address. : :: : : :: :Now THOSE were lies... : : : :: In other words, you ask for a cite and then when you get one simply : :: pretend it didn't happen. : : : :He spoke about lots of stuff but didn't deliver. : Wrong. You must really work hard to maintain your ignorance about : these things, Eric. Moon, Mars and Beyond... Three of W's words. : :: It's bad enough that you're a raving loon, El Chimpo, but it's even : :: worse that you simply don't allow ANY reality to intrude. : : : :: :: Yeah, sure. I flush better brains than you'll ever have, **** for : :: :: brains. : :: : : :: :Too bad your life formula has produce a bitter old man. : : : :: Yeah, I'm real bitter, Eric. Why, I just feel horrible every day : :: leaving my 2500 square foot home and driving my Mercedes roadster : :: (fueled by gasohol for a big part of the year, just by the way) in to : :: work every day. : : : :: Yeah, it's enough to make one bitter. : : : :: snicker : : : :Yeah, you got it made... : : : :I own two houses and my car is a gas guzzling SUV (Honda Pilot) that : :mostly my wife drives. My vechicle is a Ford pickup truck because I'm not : :afraid to get my hands dirty. : And yet here you are bleating about gasoline and all that while your : wife drives an SUV. Why, how Kerry-esque of you. I'd love to get the hybird SUV when they come out. : Assuming, of course, that anyone believes you. Why do I suspect that : if I'd said I owned two houses (and I did for a while) that you'd have : owned three and your wife would be driving an RV? Cripes the same with you. You could be living in a box and posting from the public library. It would explain a lot. : snicker ....rantings of a madman. : :: :: :Funny you mention that as I'm getting my second technical BS degree right : :: :: :now! : :: : : :: :: They don't give real degrees in BS, El Chimpo. : :: : : :: :Bachelor of Science, but you knew that. : : : :: With you one can never be sure of things like that. : : : :Better for you to check yourself, it actually is more productive than : :worrying about the guy next to you. You don't get that, though. You'd : :rather focus your energy pointing out how so-and-so is wrong rather than : :improving yourself. And we ALL know and see that... : Only when "so-and-so" is a bleating idiot like you, El Chimpo. If I truly were sheep-like as you claim, I'm certain I'd not be safe around you. : :: :: :Already have an MS in computer systems management. : :: : : :: :: In other words, you don't know how to do anything. : :: : : :: :If that is the case then you're actually negatively inclined. : : : :: You needed to get a MASTERS to manage computer systems? : : : :Resources, people and information. Computer Systems Management is more : :than learning how to operate and use a computer. : I sort of know that, El Chimpo. It's still hardly something it takes : a Masters degree to do. No, not in today's IT world. There is a lot more involved given the nature of distributed processing, networking, hardware and software integration, rapidly changing technology. Heck, IT management has never been more needed. : One of the best people I ever knew at it : walked out of his BA degree 4 hours short of finishing. You wouldn't : believe the hoops that had to be jumped through once that percolated : up and they found out what job he was in. Well, you get them to put into writing what they expect from you. Use it as a checklist and check off the items. Then you get your degree. I had a similar thing this go around within my 2nd BS. They wanted an upper level technical writing course to be completed and a copy of my 1st BS transcript. After they reviewed the transcript I made them spell out what was needed in order to complete and did it. Your friend should have done the same. No stringing along with carrot in front of your nose, etc. Force them to comply. : :: :: :I'll put my resume' up against yours any time, McClod. : :: : : :: :: I'm sure you would. Resume inflation is alive and well and I'd bet : :: :: yours REALLY blows.... : :: : : :: :...yours away. : : : :: You can leave off the 'away' and just blow me, El Chimpo. : : : :: sneer : : : :I think your boyfriend would be jealous... : You think anyone would be jealous of you? You having delusions of : adequacy again, El Chimpo? : :: :: :: :: :Get out of t he closet, Fred, you'll feel better about yourself. : :: :: :: :: : :: :: :: :: No matter how you beg, you're not my type, El Chimpo. I don't date : :: :: :: :: outside the human species. : :: :: :: : : :: :: :: :I doubt you date as much as you stalk... : :: :: : : :: :: :: But then, you seem to 'doubt' most of reality. Tighten down that : :: :: :: tinfoil beanie, El Chimpo.... : :: :: : : :: :: :You changing into an alien? : :: : : :: :: Compared to you, certainly. I'm sure any human being is an alien : :: :: species to whatever the hell you are. : :: : : :: :Poor McClod, poke a stick at him and he barks like a scared dog. It really : :: :must be tough being you. : : : :: Yeah, it's hard living in a big house, driving a sportscar, and making : :: a lot of money. : : : :You fogort the part about being miserable as hell. Possessions are't : :squat, McClod. You took the whole Madonna's "Material Girl" thing to heart : :didn't you? Money can't buy love, McClod. : Yeah. Usually the people who say that don't have any money. Or, have plenty of love and money. : Perhaps you're right, but you know what? It'll sure let you shop for : it in much nicer neighborhoods. You remind me of the guy that said money prevents sadness. Poor SOB is now broke. : :: I'm all broken up about it. : : : :Shallow, I think is the word you're mission here. : Oh, you exaggerate. You don't think. Not really... Eric : -- : "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar : territory." : --G. Behn
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| National Space Policy: NSDD-42 (issued on July 4th, 1982) | Stuf4 | History | 158 | December 13th 14 09:50 PM |
| Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | May 2nd 06 06:35 AM |
| EADS SPACE acquires Dutch Space | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | December 3rd 05 12:12 PM |
| Clueless pundits (was High-flight rate Medium vs. New Heavy lift launchers) | Rand Simberg | Space Science Misc | 18 | February 14th 04 03:28 AM |
| International Space Station Science - One of NASA's rising stars | Jacques van Oene | Space Station | 0 | December 27th 03 01:32 PM |
Linear Mode
